How serious are the media about the spread of 'misinformation'?

[Haim Arlosoroff]

Hello Kiwifam,

So I'm sure that if you've got a lady in your life, or an NPC NuMale, you've been hearing about He Who Crosses the Lines Between States and how he is not like the Great Brown Enrichment Who Cross the Lines of Nations from their friends, their TV habits, or even their side of the family. I've never been happier to be off the beaten path driving my wife crazy instead of society making her into a nutcase, but even I've been met by the "That's not funny" from a crowd who all swear they watched Jon Stewart during 9/11 and loved SNL during the Trump Years. Every single one of them believe that the Right must be tolerant, and the Left are definitionally tolerant unless the Right call them out in which case they never had to be. The Right are the violent ones—scary until they're stupid or stupid until they're scary—while the Left riot and hurt themselves. Convicted Domestic Terrorists can train BLM, but Tucker Carlson talking to people scares these people Tolerance should be extended to the truth-seekers but the Left are the only real open-minded truth-seekers in their selective empathy towards things they already agree with, while Traditional People are not. Tolerate infinite Leftist Rot and misstep but not a single argument from the Right because everything they do is wrong. Anyone saying different is a Russia-Bot or indoctrinated by the Gate of Russian Origin. Any institutional subversion by the Right is obviously a subversion of Truth, any institutional subversion by the Left is just a subversion of Russiagate. BLM is a slogan not a dog-whistle, Its Okay to be White is a dog-whistle not a slogan. Freedom of speech is for the faggot and the autistic FAS child fighting the majority opinion, deplatforming is for the Right-wingers who have unpopular views because they are not the majority opinion.

​

But what has almost gotten me into an argument more than once in the last few days is their two-facedness once the Waukesha terror attack happened. Now, while we were terrible people to say Rittenhouse did a self-defense, they'll say a Red Truck (so that they don't have to say Darrell Brooks, he who is both Kangz who enslaved the Israelite and the Actual Israelite) did a self-defense in front of kids:

NSFW:While this doesn't contain Blood, it does contain a Black murdering White Grandmas and a parade of little white girls marching for Christmas​

This is not the first time that this has happened, nor will it be the last:

​

While you may talk about Male Sterilization by COVID Vaccine, you may not talk about Female COVID Vaccine Sterilization or the miscarriages. A Christian Atheist will confront Christianity, you can even find a Muslim Atheist who confronts Islam, but if you think a Jewish Atheist will confront the Third Abrahamic Faith you are mistaken although I am sure it is for the reasons they state. KFC even used Fried Chicken as a BLM symbol and if it were Chick-fil-A they would be called out. These are all known to people, and I bring them up merely to refresh your memory to what I actually mean to bring up. I think normie 'liberals' act this way because the media has normalized it to them, not that the media normalized acting this way because they're all liberals secretly together. Liberalism is 95% NPCs by population who don't know any better, and it is the media which is making them act this way. Certainly not that the battle is already lost due to the amount of liberal sentiment thrown about in our day-to-day lives, that is the real fake news.

​

Do you think the media are to blame for this wave of hypocrisy and the displays of complete moral about-face we see in society? Did we learn it as kids parented by first the TV and later our phones, or where did it come from? Are liberals on-screen and off just practicing the Friend-Enemy distinction? I don't think the sides have formed quite so firmly yet amongst the base population that we day-to-day are practicing the Friend-Enemy distinction every time we censor ourselves or act hypocritically, but I could be wrong. I do think Oswald Spengler's 'bombardment of intellectual artillery' is happening so that hardly anyone can attain an inward detachment that is needed to keep a clear view of this monstrous drama of modernity. The Powers That Be operating under a pure democratic disguise have finished off their masterpiece which is mainstream media so well that the NPC's sense of freedom is actually flattered by the most thorough-going enslavement that has ever existed. Der NORMIE die believing they are smarter than you, with a smile on their face.

I'm Not even going to include one White getting raped to death in foreign lands trying to prove it impossible, but believe me when I say that it is often.​

Am I wrong, do the media indeed love objectivity and hate pushing an agenda for The Powers That Be? Are these people getting Journalism Degrees just living off the 15-year-old "reality has a well-known liberal bias" quote from Colbert's Bush-Era 2006 White House Correspondents' Dinner? Are they fighting to keep their class of journalists and lumpenpoliticians like Joe Scarborough and Laura Loomer above the waterline during the drowning of the American Economy?

TL;DR: Are the media serious when they go after misinformation? They spout lies all the time.​

 

[Blasterisk]

They're serious about the spread of misinformation like a cheese knife is serious about the spread of Brie.

 

[The Mass Shooter Ron Soye]

At the very least, they are serious about deplatforming and crushing competitors.

 

[DumbDude42]

the media care about "misinformation" in the exact same way as this old commie from the chernobyl tv show

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

They're serious about the spread of disinformation, in the sense that they want to be the only ones allowed to spread it.

 

[The-Patriarchy]

The media *IS* the misinformation

 

[Helvítis Túristi]

Misinformation in the media has always been a thing dating back centuries. Always with the intent of influencing public opinion and determining legislation. The early cases that pop to my mind was the false flag operation to get the US involved in WW1 and Walter Darantey's New York Times articles denying a famine that killed 10 million. People are starting to catch on and look to alternatives to the news media, which is why the news media is doing hit pieces on alternatives as conspiracy sources and discrediting them.

 

[Haim Arlosoroff]

Walter Darantey's New York Times articles denying a famine that killed 10 million.

The fact that Walter Duranty's Pulitzer Prize wasn't revoked because of the scandal that would cause tells you everything you need to know about journalism. The New York Times' editor, Karl Meyer writing that Duranty's articles were "some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper." rather than clearly the worst, because it likely wasn't, tells you everything you need to know about that 'Newspaper of record'.

I had forgotten about the Denial of the Holodomor being a matter of a Newspaper of record, when that same editorial board would clearly fire a man about admitting some of the exaggerations present at the Nuremburg Trials like the lampshades.

 

[Bad Gateway]

It's not misinformation it's sponsored content.

 

[The Nothingness]

This one scene from a boomer movie best sums up how insidious the media (specifically with television) has been for decades.

 

[DiscoRodeo]

I'd rephrase it this way.

The media is adamant about 'setting the record straight', but not about combatting misinformation. What I mean by that is, the media is geared towards supporting, highlighting, and propagating things that support their own narrative, and critical of anything that detracts from that.

For example: Tiktok during Kyle Rittenhouse censored content praising him or in support of the man/anything counter to the narrative that he was an evil kid and an active school shooter. People were even banned for supporting him.

Facebook, treated him as if he was a mass shooter.

I don't know about traditional media, but social media is very active in spreading misinformation under the guise of 'setting the record straight'.